Do medical student's surgical examination scores correlate with performance markers?

BACKGROUND: Some medical school training consists of oral examinations. METHODS: We conducted a 9-year review of third-year medical student examinations including oral examinations, National Board of Medical Examiners Surgery Subject Examination (SSE, ie, shelf), and United States Medical Licensing Examinations Step 1 and Step 2. RESULTS: Step 1 showed a moderate to strong association with Period 1 orals (Somers' D = .297, P < .001), but not Period 2 orals (Somers' D = .048, P = .053). Period 1 orals (percentage) had a strong association with SSE (Somers' D = .356, P < .001) and Step 2 (Somers' D = .368, P < .001). Period 2 orals (pass/fail) suggested a positive, but not statistically significant, association with SSE (Somers' D = .334, P = .085) and Step 2 (Somers' D = .370, P = .055). Step 1 shows a strong association with SSE (Somers' D = .490, P < .001). SSE showed a strong association with Step 2 (Somers' D = .506, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Orals can be used to identify students who may have difficulty passing the SSE. Step 1 can be used to identify students at risk of poor performance on the SSE, and SSE can be used to identify students at risk for poor performance on Step 2.

Evaluation of changes in breast architecture after preoperative chemotherapy for breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although use of preoperative chemotherapy for breast cancer is increasing, resultant changes in breast architecture have not been described. The purpose of this study was to examine breast architecture changes in response to chemotherapy by the placement of 4 peripheral clips. METHODS: In a prospective case-series of breast cancer patients selected to undergo preoperative chemotherapy, 4 clips were placed peripherally to each mass using sonographic guidance. Mammograms documented tumor size and clip locations both before chemotherapy and after chemotherapy. Percentage reduction in area was calculated based on the tumor dimensions and distances between clips. RESULTS: In 16 participants, 87.5% of lesions had a significant response to chemotherapy. Changes in clip measurements varied widely from significant reduction to significant increase and did not correlate with changes in tumor size. The Pearson correlation coefficient comparing changes in tumor size and clip measurements was .036 (P = .895). CONCLUSIONS: There was no correlation between reduction in tumor size and change in clip measurements. Further research should be conducted using noncompression breast imaging modalities to eliminate possible distortion caused by mammographic compression.

Do topical anesthetics reduce periareolar injectional pain before sentinel lymph node biopsy?

BACKGROUND: Topical anesthetics have been used in various procedures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate efficacy of lidocaine/prilocaine cream in decreasing the pain of injection for sentinel lymph node biopsy. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled study was conducted on female breast cancer patients undergoing periareolar injection for sentinel lymph node isolation. Subjects applied lidocaine/prilocaine cream or a placebo cream before injection and completed a survey postoperatively. RESULTS: Twenty treatment and 19 control patients were studied. There was a trend for control subjects to indicate that the injection was "painful" or "extremely painful" more often than treatment subjects (52.6% vs 25.0%, respectively, P = .074). The treatment group was more likely to recommend the cream to other cancer patients (70.0% vs 42.1%), with a trend toward significance (P = .076). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed no statistically significant reduction in pain scores in subjects receiving the topical anesthetic. Further studies targeting patients with low pain tolerance may prove more effective.

Do strong resident teachers help medical students on objective examinations of knowledge?

BACKGROUND: Despite a lack of formal training, surgical residents at our institution have an integral role instructing medical students on their general surgery clerkship. It is unknown how the instruction provided by surgical residents affects the students' testable knowledge base and performance on standardized surgical examinations. The purpose of this survey study was to evaluate the impact of surgical resident teachers on medical student performance on the National Board of Medical Examiners surgery shelf examination. STUDY DESIGN: Surveys were provided to all third-year medical students completing an 8-week clerkship in general surgery. Students were asked to rate the quality and quantity of instruction received from surgical residents. Resident instruction was evaluated in several categories using a 5-point Likert scale. Analyses were conducted to evaluate the impact of survey responses on student percentile scores on the surgery shelf examination. RESULTS: Seventy-five of 110 (67.3%) students completed the surveys over a period of 22 months. Forty-two individual residents were evaluated in several categories, and an overall teaching evaluation was completed. The mean shelf percentile score by the medical students was 48.1 ± 31.4 (range, 1st to 98th percentile). Using univariate analyses, no individual resident factors or overall factors had a significant effect on student performance. A regression analysis revealed that overall quality of instruction had a significantly positive impact on student performance (p = 0.038). Individual residents and increasing PGY level had a significantly negative impact on the students' shelf performance (p < 0.001). The model R(2) showed our model to predict only 13.8% of the student's examination score variability. CONCLUSIONS: A statistically significant relationship exists between student performance on the shelf examination and their perception of the overall quality of instruction that they receive from surgical residents. However, this seems to account only for a small portion of the variability in student percentile scores.

Influence of fibrin glue on seroma formation after breast surgery.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to determine the effectiveness of Hemaseel APR fibrin sealant versus conventional drain placement in the prevention of seromas after breast procedures. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, controlled study of subjects who were randomized into control (drain) and experimental (fibrin) groups was conducted. RESULTS: Analysis of 82 patients showed similarly matched groups. Seroma formation rate was 45.5% in the control group and 36.8% in the fibrin glue group (P = 0.43). The rate of wound complications was similar. Aspirate volumes were significantly greater in the fibrin glue group. Drain placement saved patients >366 US dollars over fibrin glue. CONCLUSIONS: Although use of fibrin sealant resulted in a nonsignificant decrease in seroma formation rate compared with that of drain placement, the higher cost involved, cumbersome technique, and higher aspirate volumes tend to indicate that there is no advantage to using fibrin glue over drain placement with the technique described.

An evaluation of resident training in breast procedures.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine if senior residents are participating in advanced level breast cases. METHODS: A retrospective review of 1,583 breast procedures on 1,213 patients over 2 years was performed. Each case was evaluated for the type of case: (1) junior level (PGY 1 and 2)--core needle biopsy, fine needle aspirate, excisional biopsy, needle localized biopsy, lumpectomy, partial mastectomy, and simple mastectomy; and (2) senior level--stereotactic breast biopsy, sentinel lymph node biopsy, axillary dissection, and modified radical mastectomy. All cases were reviewed for level of resident involved. RESULTS: Overall, seniors performed 31% of the cases, junior residents performed 42%, and 27% were unattended by any resident. Senior level breast cases were specifically examined to compare whether a senior or junior was present. Overall, 891 defined senior cases were performed. A senior level resident attended 34% of these, leaving 66% covered by junior residents or uncovered altogether. CONCLUSIONS: It is clear when evaluating breast procedures that senior residents are less involved than junior residents. Furthermore, the fact that many of the reported cases (28%) and, more significantly, senior level cases (26%) have no resident involved leads us to conclude that senior level residents are not taking advantage of the opportunity to gain experience in performing advanced level breast procedures in our surgical program.